AF opines about what is "missing from the studies". The studies were not designed to satisfy whatever criteria happen to pop into AF's head.
The clinical work follows a protocol worked out together with the FDA and is designed to provide the information which the FDA deems necessary to evaluate the drug. When the FDA approves a protocol and later accepts the submission for approval, it signals that it has the information it needs to evaluate the drug for release to the market. If there is missing information, then the FDA does not accept the application.
I don't know what AF is talking about with regard to missing information.
he was wrong about whether arna would be approved but exactly right about arnas stock performance. so don't discount him. he is part of the wall street community and he knows
what the street thinks. obnoxious yes, but to be ignored no.
Good Lord, stuff does come back out of nowhere. I have been out of ARNA for a long time. I bought back a few shares, but couldn't generate any enthusiasm for it, or fat pill in general, and fled from it forever when Credit Suisse gave it a red thumb, (so resented by loco, speaking of the red thumb).
I made 7 figures on ARNA,after a complete hosing by DNDN and their criminal management, it was my ticket back to among the living. I do not hate AF, I just prefer not to hear from him. You have to know when to hold'em and when to fold'em.
I prefer not to cross paths. There are less able editions of his kind.
AF's view of ATRS is all subjective opinions, with no factual data included. He clearly is misinformed and did not do any homework before penning that article. He has no medical background. He also tries to equate Market cap to just product sales, and does not account for Intellectual Property or partnership milestone payments, which I guess have zero valie in his opinion. He did not assign any value to the Teva and PFE products in the pipeline. Just plain weak!
Hate to tell you but AF knows way more than most on this board about biotech and the FDA's dance in either approving or issuing a CRL. Just B/c you don't like what he has to say don't conclude he's misinformed or no medical background.
Exactly right rearview. To the uninformed, the article gets read and those that are uninformed, take it word for word as if it's gospel. The article simply shows a bad understanding of the facts by AF.